I've grown tired of earmarks being the hip thing to complain about. It makes little sense. Complaints about spending are one thing, but to single out the earmark process in a general sense is not the same thing. When an earmark is created its somebody you've heard of (and can fire by voting against them) going out on a limb and putting their name on a specific piece of spending. The alternative is handing out huge amounts of money to bureaucrats you can't vote against and letting them make the decisions. Now obviously its an option to just not spend the money at all, but I'd like to set that aside and focus this thread on the process, assuming its not optional to not spend. What would you rather have? Accountability in your elected leaders or them being able to hide behind a faceless wall of bureaucrats who take the blame? I much prefer the scenario where stupid spending bill #243,908 can be blamed on someone who can be fired by the voters.